You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Do people think there's a difference between personal taste and good taste? Because I actually do. This may be where Fi vs Fe plays a role in judging beauty.

Looking at someone else's taste, say, in clothing or art, you judge it according to your own personal taste. If it doesn't comply with it, it's bad taste. If it does, it's good taste. That's how I define the difference anyhow. Sorry if what I just said doesn't make any sense, I am awful at expressing myself.

Fe motivates the individual to adapt to the objective situation. This manifests itself in the form of accepting beauty (in this situation) because it is conventional under all circumstances. Do not confuse "beauty" as the moral of this story, since beauty is chiefly concerned with aesthetics, not the convention of external feelings.

Fi motivates the individual to adapt the objective situation to the individual, depending on whether the situation is acceptable by the criteria of the individual. Because if this, it is often referred to as an "idealistic" function. It is chiefly concerned with realizing the inner-ideal in terms of one's own appreciation of feeling abstraction.

This thread title should be changed to Fe and agreeability. What Jung is really pointing out is that Fe taken to an extreme would rather forego its real opinion, simply to keep the peace. The fact that he chose to use art to illustrate the point, doesn't mean those with a strong preference for Fe don't know what beauty is. That is not what is going on here.

What if someone with a strong preference for Fe is out to dinner and rather than tell the waiter the food really stinks, they tell them their dinner is "fine." Well, surely you aren't going to suggest the person doesn't know what good food is now, are you? That would be silly.

The underlying issue is the same whether we use art or food to illustrate the point - a strong Fe preference would rather be agreeable, than disagreeable, in order to avoid conflict.

ha...makes perfect sense...very important point to make yeah...my infj mother is an artist and has a very defined and elegant aesthetic...she certainly is very influenced by beauty...it colors her whole world and is very much a part of her.

There can’t be any large-scale revolution until there’s a personal revolution, on an individual level. It’s got to happen inside first.

The underlying issue is the same whether we use art or food to illustrate the point - a strong Fe preference would rather be agreeable, than disagreeable, in order to avoid conflict.

I'm not trying to spark controversy here, Jag, but I think that Fi can manifest itself for a person to be conflict avoidant or agreeable as well.

I think that, if someone's opinion is shaped by Fe, this motivates them to consider the feelings of others to be socially conventional. This, by all means, does not mean that it is not their real opinion. It's just that their opinion is shaped moreso by external feelings than internal feelings.

One's internal feelings may dictate that they agree that the food is nice, even though their own standards determine that it is not. For instance, maybe the individual does not want to be slapped by the cook because this would not be acceptable by internal criteria.

I'm not trying to spark controversy here, Jag, but I think that Fi can manifest itself for a person to be conflict avoidant or agreeable as well.

I think that, if someone's opinion is shaped by Fe, this motivates them to consider the feelings of others to be socially conventional. This, by all means, does not mean that it is not their real opinion. It's just that their opinion is shaped moreso by external feelings than internal feelings.

One's internal feelings may dictate that they agree that the food is nice, even though their own standards determine that it is not. For instance, maybe the individual does not want to be slapped by the cook because this would not be acceptable by internal criteria.

Yep. Sometimes I think about other people's feelings with my Fi. I think it's overly simplistic to say that's always Fe. Like I remember even as a child of seven or eight years old intuitively understanding that when my grandfather gave me a gift, if I said I didn't like it, it would make him feel bad...even if I really didn't like it. And my Fi told me that I didn't want to make grandpa feel bad, because I loved him, and somehow understood even at that age that acts of service and gift giving were how he showed love (even though I obviously didn't have the vocabulary to articulate such thoughts at that point in my life)...and saying that I didn't like the doll or the dress would be like emotionally slapping him in the face.

So it's not always my own face my Fi is concerned about. Just sayin'...

I'm not trying to spark controversy here, Jag, but I think that Fi can manifest itself for a person to be conflict avoidant or agreeable as well.

I never said Fi couldn't. But this thread is about Fe. Controversy would be telling me I had the I.Q. of a North American, male, prostitute.

I think that, if someone's opinion is shaped by Fe, this motivates them to consider the feelings of others to be socially conventional. This, by all means, does not mean that it is not their real opinion. It's just that their opinion is shaped moreso by external feelings than internal feelings.

One's internal feelings may dictate that they agree that the food is nice, even though their own standards determine that it is not. For instance, maybe the individual does not want to be slapped by the cook because this would not be acceptable by internal criteria.

First of all I was addressing what Jung wrote. Go back to the OP. This is what I said about Jung's comments:

"What Jung is really pointing out is that Fe taken to an extreme would rather forego its real opinion, simply to keep the peace. "

I stand by my interpretation of what Jung was trying to convey.
It seems you glossed over my words, "taken to an extreme," and you now somehow think I suggested Fe won't ever give its real opinion.
That is not the case.

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. — Mark Twain

Active Ingredient

I never said Fi couldn't. But this thread is about Fe. Controversy would be telling me I had the I.Q. of a North American, male, prostitute.

First of all I was addressing what Jung wrote. Go back to the OP. This is what I said about Jung's comments:

"What Jung is really pointing out is that Fe taken to an extreme would rather forego its real opinion, simply to keep the peace. "

I stand by my interpretation of what Jung was trying to convey.
It seems you glossed over my words, "taken to an extreme," and you now somehow think I suggested Fe won't ever give its real opinion.
That is not the case.